TL;DR
Get everyday helpers delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
An international study using genetic data from nearly 2.8 million people identified 127 loci associated with Alzheimer’s disease, including 48 not previously reported. The researchers also found that estimates of genetic contribution can vary by method; the findings point to immune-cell and neuronal biology but do not establish new treatments or prove that genes account for more risk than prior estimates.
An international study drawing on genetic data from nearly 2.8 million people identified 127 loci associated with Alzheimer’s disease, including 48 not previously reported, and examined whether standard methods have understated the role of inherited risk. The findings, published in Nature, link Alzheimer’s-associated genetics to processes involving microglia and neurons, but do not show that genes alone determine who develops the disease.
The researchers combined data from 30 cohorts, including 109,479 people with Alzheimer’s, 74,141 proxy cases, 2,131,799 controls and 499,708 proxy controls. Proxy cases were people whose mother or father was reported to have Alzheimer’s or dementia; they did not have the disease themselves in this analysis. The study’s effective sample size was 416,493, and about 91% of that sample was of European ancestry.
The multi-ancestry analysis found 118 significant loci; a further nine were identified in an analysis limited to people of European ancestry. In total, 48 of the 127 loci had not previously been reported. The team also identified 72 significant gene sets, with results pointing to lipid binding, immune activation, amyloid breakdown and cell adhesion, among other biological processes.
Analyses found enrichment of Alzheimer’s genetic associations among genes expressed in microglia, brain immune cells. Associations were also found among genes underexpressed in three neuronal populations, although those neuronal results weakened after adjustment for differences in expression across cell types. The study further prioritized five potential drug targets—RRM2B, SYK, KEAP1, CACNA1S and AXL—but did not test them as treatments. Earlier research cited by the study had mixed findings for interventions involving these targets.
Why Genetic Estimates May Change
Twin studies have estimated that 60% to 80% of Alzheimer’s susceptibility is heritable, while earlier analyses of common genetic variants suggested they explained about 5% of disease liability. Those figures describe different measures and should not be treated as direct equivalents: heritability estimates depend on the population and method, and do not mean that a person’s risk is predetermined.
The new work matters because it expands the set of genetic regions associated with Alzheimer’s and compares methods for estimating the contribution of common variants. A more complete account of genetic risk could help researchers investigate disease mechanisms and, eventually, improve risk prediction. The findings also reinforce the relevance of immune-cell biology alongside neuronal processes, broadening the biological questions researchers can test.
However, identifying an associated locus does not by itself establish which gene causes the association or how it affects disease. Nor does a potential drug target identified through genetic and computational analyses amount to evidence that a medicine aimed at it will work. The researchers’ findings are a basis for further investigation, not a treatment recommendation.
Popular right now
Bose QuietComfort True Wireless Earbuds with Active Noise Cancellation, Black
Bose QuietComfort Wireless Earbuds with Active Noise Cancellation, Dewdrop Mint
Jura E6 Automatic Espresso Machine, Piano Black (15622)
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From Heritability to Risk Loci
Alzheimer’s is the most common form of dementia. The study notes that dementia from all causes is projected to affect 153 million people worldwide by 2050. Earlier genome-wide association studies had identified about 80 Alzheimer’s risk loci, while research using single-nucleotide polymorphisms had estimated a comparatively small share of disease liability from common variants.
To investigate genetic associations, the team analyzed groups by ancestry and combined results across groups. It used several approaches to prioritize genes and pathways, and compared SNP-based heritability estimates from SBayesRC with estimates from linkage disequilibrium score regression. Simulations using UK Biobank data were also used to examine differences between estimation methods. This design makes the paper both a genetics report and an examination of how measurement choices shape estimates.
The ancestry breakdown limits how evenly the results can be interpreted. The researchers reported that ancestry-specific findings were less precise in groups with smaller samples. The large total number of participants does not remove that imbalance: most of the effective sample was European, so the study provides less statistical certainty for some other ancestry groups.
Limits in Risk and Cell Findings
The results do not settle exactly how much inherited variation contributes to Alzheimer’s risk. Heritability estimates depend on the data and statistical method, and the study compared approaches rather than establishing a single definitive figure. The supplied report does not give a new headline percentage that replaces earlier estimates.
Some biological links also remain unresolved. After adjustment for average differences in gene expression among cell types, the microglial association remained significant, but the neuronal associations became only nominally significant. Although inflammatory microglial states showed the strongest association, no individual microglial state reached statistical significance. The researchers also said it remains uncertain whether the observed neuronal expression differences contribute to Alzheimer’s or result from neurodegeneration.
Because ancestry groups were unevenly represented, estimates for groups with smaller samples were less precise. The study also did not test its proposed drug targets as Alzheimer’s treatments. Whether those targets can lead to safe, effective therapies—or improve prediction for individuals—remains unknown.
Research Needed Beyond Association
The next steps are to test the proposed genes and pathways in independent datasets and experimental studies, and to clarify which associations reflect causal changes in brain biology. Researchers will also need larger and more balanced ancestry samples to improve the precision and reach of genetic findings.
For the proposed drug targets, further laboratory and clinical research would be needed before any could be considered a treatment. The study itself does not report a clinical trial or a change to current care. Its immediate contribution is an expanded map of Alzheimer’s genetic associations and an evaluation of why methods can produce different estimates of common-variant risk.
Key Questions
What did the study find?
Researchers reported 127 Alzheimer’s-associated genetic loci, including 48 not previously reported, and identified biological pathways involving immune activity, lipids, amyloid processing and cell adhesion.
Does this mean genes determine whether someone gets Alzheimer’s?
No. The findings concern population-level genetic associations and estimates of inherited susceptibility. They do not mean that a person’s outcome is predetermined or that genes are the only influence on risk.
Did the researchers find a new Alzheimer’s treatment?
No. The study highlighted five potential drug targets, but did not test them as treatments. The findings require further experimental and clinical research.
How representative was the study across ancestry groups?
The analysis included five broad ancestry groups, but about 91% of its effective sample was European. The researchers said results were less precise for groups with smaller samples.
What does it mean to say genetic risk may have been underestimated?
The researchers examined how different methods estimate the contribution of common genetic variants. Their work suggests estimates can depend on the method used; the report does not establish a replacement percentage for Alzheimer’s heritability.
Source: news-medical.net
